issued by the Registrar of the Court
ECHR 135 (2025)
05.06.2025
Judgments and decisions of 5 June 2025
The European Court of Human Rights has today notified in writing four judgments1 and ten decisions2:
two Chamber judgments are summarised below;
separate press releases have been issued for two other Chamber judgments in the cases of Cioffi
v. Italy (application no. 17710/15) and Spivak v. Ukraine (no. 21180/15);
The judgments summarised below are available only in French.
Anna Maria Ciccone v. Italy (application no. 21492/17)
The applicant, Anna Maria Ciccone, is an Italian national who was born in 1959. She is a radiologist by
profession.
In 2008 Ms Ciccone and others were accused of complicity in involuntary manslaughter. The
authorities alleged that she had failed to diagnose a fractured femur in a patient who had been
hospitalised following an assault.
Ms Ciccone was acquitted by the Assize Court at first instance, then sentenced on appeal to eight
months’ imprisonment and ordered to pay damages to the civil parties.
She complains that the Assize Court of Appeal set aside her first-instance acquittal without summoning
or taking evidence from the experts appointed by the public prosecutor’s office.
She relies on Article 6 (right to a fair trial) of the European Convention on Human Rights.
Violation of Article 6 § 1
Just satisfaction: The Court held that the finding of a violation constituted in itself sufficient just
satisfaction for any non-pecuniary damage sustained by the applicant and that the respondent State
was to pay her 5 001,17 euros (EUR) for costs and expenses.
The applicant, Doina-Ioana Străisteanu, is a Moldovan national who was born in 1978 and lives in
Chişinău. She is a lawyer by profession.
In this case, the applicant complains about the administrative courts’ order to remove from her
Facebook page videos showing a colleague making insulting and homophobic remarks to her.
She relies on Article 10 (freedom of expression) of the European Convention.
1
Under Articles 43 and 44 of the Convention, Chamber judgments are not final. During the three-month period following a Chamber
judgment’s delivery, any party may request that the case be referred to the Grand Chamber of the Court. If such a request is made, a panel
of five judges considers whether the case deserves further examination. In that event, the Grand Chamber will hear the case and deliver a
final judgment. If the referral request is refused, the Chamber judgment will become final on that day. Under Article 28 of the Convention,
judgments delivered by a Committee are final.
Once a judgment becomes final, it is transmitted to the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe for supervision of its execution.
Further information about the execution process can be found here: www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/execution
2
Inadmissibility and strike-out decisions are final.
